Interesting to read, but I'm not sure many of his points add up. Is the love people have for Federer really all about the beauty of his game? That's a part of what I enjoy about watching Federer, but I don't think it's as simple as Federer plays beautiful tennis while Djokovic plays ugly tennis.

Looking for an angle I guess but not convincing. Interestingly, Nadal suffered the same accusations. Supposedly, Fed would have the monopoly on "aesthetically pleasing" tennis. Fancy excuse to keep heaping praise on Fed when he loses and take away whatever credit possible from the others when they win. Fed nuts are relentlessly devoted to their cause, you have to give them that.

Looking for an angle I guess but not convincing. Interestingly, Nadal suffered the same accusations. Supposedly, Fed would have the monopoly on "aesthetically pleasing" tennis. Fancy excuse to keep heaping praise on Fed when he loses and take away whatever credit possible from the others when they win. Fed nuts are unrelentlessly devoted to their cause, you have to give them that.

Click to expand...

tbh i find murray's or djokovic is game more aesthetically pleasing nadal right after and then fed

I get the point and though not totally but somehow agree with the article... One thing is for sure, that nole despite being at his best form and times of his career Isn't as popular as fedal... not only personality-wise but also aesthetically we all would agree that fedal are on another league than murray and novak.

Djokovic is the super grinder, the uber grinder who transcends grinding with his ability to defend both sides of the court equally well and then explode into offense. His consistent depth is amazing. Not my cup of tea at all as far as watching pleasure goes, but he's playing fantastically effective tennis.

I get the point and though not totally but somehow agree with the article... One thing is for sure, that nole despite being at his best form and times of his career Isn't as popular as fedal... not only personality-wise but also aesthetically we all would agree that fedal are on another league than murray and novak.

Click to expand...

No, we can't all agree with this. Especially about Nadal. You can say whatever you want about Murray and Djokovic's personality, but they are definitely not below Nadal when it comes to aesthetics. Nadal with his over-the-head forehand finishes and scrappy backhands is no oil painting on court..

Djokovic's movement seems unsightly, but there's something very ruthless and efficient about it all the same. In that sense, it is also aesthetically-pleasing, but it's a very different aesthetic - Novak is basically a Gumby Terminator. Fed's is more like a ballerina, and I guess that one's easier for people to appreciate.

I get the feeling that how he plays is very dependent on who he's playing. For example the AO final was just horrible. He adjusts his game to his opponent. Murray didn't play aggressive, Djokovic felt that he didn't need to be aggressive either to win. He thought he could tough it out and he did. Against Federer he feels like he can't play to defensive or Federer will hit a couple of winners and run away with the match, he can't let Federer dominate. So in a way, he plays just as offensive as the opponent.. only does it better.
I don't know, his last match against Murray was just too boring and passive for me to be able to enjoy it, but I loved his match against Federer in the US Open 2011 (despite the outcome). I've watched the highlights of that match at least 10 times. Just laser beams all over the court.

I get the feeling that how he plays is very dependent on who he's playing. For example the AO final who just horrible. He adjusts his game to his opponent. Murray didn't play aggressive, Djokovic felt that he didn't need to be aggressive either to win. He thought he could tough it out and he did. Against Federer he feels like he can't play to defensive or Federer will hit a couple of winners and run away with the match, he can't let Federer dominate. So in a way, he plays just as offensive as the opponent.. only does it better.
I don't know, his last match against Murray was just too boring and passive for me to be able to enjoy it, but I loved his match against Federer in the US Open 2011 (despite the outcome). I've watched the highlights of that match at least 10 times. Just laser beams all over the court.

Click to expand...

Good points, but the USO courts are a bit faster too. Fed and Djokovic's AO matches are not exactly great either.

]Djokovic is the super grinder, the uber grinder who transcends grinding with his ability to defend both sides of the court equally well and then explode into offense. His consistent depth is amazing[/B]. Not my cup of tea at all as far as watching pleasure goes, but he's playing fantastically effective tennis.

Click to expand...

Nailed it for me with this spot on description.

I don't find his game ugly personally. Quite the contrary, I find it mesmerizing - as I do with all the top players (Rafa, Fed, Nole), in all the diversity of their respective styles, when they are so at the top of their games.

If he stays healthy, of course he will be capable of doing that. It's not like you are physically handicapped the moment you turn 30. Djokovic might be doing even more of that in his 30s as his game starts losing effectiveness and he has to defend even more. Djokovic pulls out this move only when he is on the backfoot. The vast majority of his groundstrokes are struck normally.

Is the love people have for Federer really all about the beauty of his game?

Click to expand...

No. Some people like him because he has all those trophies. Others like him because he plays a beautiful, seemingly effortless style. Leaving aside other unimportant factors, for most people it is some weighted combination of these two.

Supposedly, Fed would have the monopoly on "aesthetically pleasing" tennis.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Many players have had it in the past. Mecir was considered beautiful, so was Michael Stich. Mandlikova was considered graceful too. People who make the claim about Fed having the monopoly on beauty are either way up the Federer fanboy scale, or way too sensitive about Federer praise.

Fancy excuse to keep heaping praise on Fed when he loses and take away whatever credit possible from the others when they win. Fed nuts are relentlessly devoted to their cause, you have to give them that.

Click to expand...

I am a self-professed Fed nut, and I don't see it in the above way. I can simultaneously hold the two thoughts in my mind (1) Federer plays beautifully (2) The other players beat him fair and square. So, you generalize, and like most generalizations, yours is an inaccurate one. It is more likely a reflection on your over-sensitive attitude towards Federer praise. Face it: He plays beautiful tennis, just like many of us face the fact that other players will deservedly take him to the woodshed from time to time. Ultimately, in terms of winning a trophy, aesthetic beauty isn't worth a hill of beans, and many of us understand that all too well.

Not necessarily. Many players have had it in the past. Mecir was considered beautiful, so was Michael Stich. Mandlikova was considered graceful too. People who make the claim about Fed having the monopoly on beauty are either way up the Federer fanboy scale, or way too sensitive about Federer praise.

Click to expand...

you only forgot edberg, rios, korda, nalbandian,leconte,nastase .... also Goolagong among the ladies ...

Looking for an angle I guess but not convincing. Interestingly, Nadal suffered the same accusations. Supposedly, Fed would have the monopoly on "aesthetically pleasing" tennis. Fancy excuse to keep heaping praise on Fed when he loses and take away whatever credit possible from the others when they win. Fed nuts are relentlessly devoted to their cause, you have to give them that.

Click to expand...

So angry. Fed's tennis is not just aesthetically pleasing, it's efficient. That's the real reason people admire it so much. Efficiency is the reason that, at 31, Fed can be #2 in the world, make a GS semi, and take the USO champ to 5 sets. All while never so much as breaking a sweat. Nadal and Novak will be lucky if they can walk at 31 the way they play.